told you it was coming.

[LondonManc]

What next, sentencing someone to do time because their parent died before they were convicted?

Pretty much what’s being asked for here.

[SueEllen]

What next, sentencing someone to do time because their parent died before they were convicted?

Pretty much what’s being asked for here.

Well personality has a genetic component....

[LondonManc]

Well personality has a genetic component....

Think yours skipped a generation.

[vetran]

Sorted- so then the British government needs to compensate descendants of slaves, and the British government needs to get some of the money everyone paid to the slave owners from the companies and individuals whose ancestors were slave owners to form part of this compensation....

Why? Just because it is distasteful and immoral, it wasn't illegal at the time in the UK or Africa. Never really liked the idea of

Droit du seigneur - Wikipedia

do we get some money back for Scottish maidenhoods?

Its a rabbit hole

How much do we give them? If we paid the going African king's rate for a slave in the first is the African Kingdom responsible for reparations? Do we pay the same as all the other slaving nations? etc.

As I say lets do IG Farben first.

[xoggoth]

Agree with what V said. Simplistic nonsense. Why should all Brits pick up this bill when many of their ancestors were also exploited by the rich, working in conditions hardly better than those endured by slaves? When the ancestors of many who would benefit from such reparations were themselves complicit in slavery?

[NotAllThere]

There must be a substantial amount of back pay owed to those who should benefit from the estates of those enslaved. Calculate it at an assumed number of hours per week at the then market rate for a farm labourer, domestic servant etc. Work out what the liability sum is first, and then work out who the beneficiaries and liable parties are.

I think it's a great idea. It could end up we're all in debt to each other. Then we could just reset the clock at zero and get on with life.

So you accept you're OK with historic war crimes if they were legal at the time and 'everyone was doing it'?

Nope. But I think what happens outside of living memory happened. We are where we are now.We know what was then was tulip. It's far too complex to unravel who did what to whom so far better look to the future than the past. No matter how good and virtuous it might make the activists feel.

[SueEllen]

Why? Just because it is distasteful and immoral, it wasn't illegal at the time in the UK or Africa. Never really liked the idea of

Droit du seigneur - Wikipedia

So the law is always right?

do we get some money back for Scottish maidenhoods?

Its a rabbit hole

Only if you engage in whataboutery. We are talking about British involvement in the trans-Atlantic slave trade here not anything else.

How much do we give them?

We first need to work out the compensation the british public gave to slave owners plus how much individuals, companies, organisations and the British government profited from it.

If we paid the going African king's rate for a slave in the first is the African Kingdom responsible for reparations? Do we pay the same as all the other slaving nations? etc.

As I say lets do IG Farben first.

More whataboutery.

[Old Greg]

What next, sentencing someone to do time because their parent died before they were convicted?

Pretty much what’s being asked for here.

Are individuals being targeted, or state and corporate entities? Do you think national debts should be written off periodically so that citizens of a country aren't laden with historic debts?

[vetran]

So the law is always right?


Only if you engage in whataboutery. We are talking about British involvement in the trans-Atlantic slave trade here not anything else.



We first need to work out the compensation the british public gave to slave owners plus how much individuals, companies, organisations and the British government profited from it.


More whataboutery.

No we change the law and from then on there are penalties for those that disobey the law , its how it works.

Strangely pertinent facts are not whataboutery even if you don't agree with them being mentioned. The African rulers being totally complicit in slavery is pertinent as is the trade being legal. I don't like either of those facts but they are true.

The British involvement in the transatlantic slave trade was to end it an slavery generally after millenia at considerable cost to the UK. Before that it was a totally legal enterprise indulged in by almost every country. If you want you can demand reparations from tobacco, alcohol and petroleum companies do tell us how you get on. If companies leaving those areas are given grants to change should we punish them?

We need to draw a line under it and deal with important matters. Slavery is still permitted in Africa and other areas lets abolish that.

Why just the British? it was endemic. Or are we just seen as an easy touch?

[LondonManc]

Are individuals being targeted, or state and corporate entities?

If it's the state, then we're all being targeted surely?
If it's individuals, how do you achieve that acurately?
If it's corporate entities, they'll find a way of passing the costs on or lawyers will tie people in knots.

Do you think national debts should be written off periodically so that citizens of a country aren't laden with historic debts?

Tougher question - just gives anyone a licence to spend and not give a toss. Blair and Brown for example.